Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, this is a small business bill. Let me tell you why this is relevant. The biggest challenge to small businesses in America today is the high cost of energy. Let me say that again. The biggest challenge to America's small businesses today is the high cost of energy.

Here's an article from a paper: ``Independent Truckers,'' they're small businessmen, ``Join Strike.'' Why? Over $4 a barrel for diesel, $4 a gallon for diesel fuel. They can't operate. You wonder why food prices are going up? Gas prices are too high.

What has the Democrat majority done? Nothing.

This is a great opportunity to bring all our collective ideas, put legislation in front of the American people, and say let's vote on bills that will affect and lower the cost of gasoline.

Now, the Democrats should be happy about this because Speaker Pelosi promised in April of 2006 that the Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices. In 2006. We're still waiting for the plan.

In fact, there is a plan. The plan is this: The plan is for the barrel of crude oil to go up. When the Democrats took the majority, it was $58 a barrel. What is it today? It's $117.36. When you have no plan, you plan to fail.

You want to help small businesses? Bring an energy bill to the floor that brings on more supply.

Look at what it has done at the gas pump. You've heard the terminology: ``Pelosi premium.'' The price of a gallon of gasoline when the Democrats took over: $2.33. What is it today? It's $3.53. Add to that climate change legislation, Chairman Dingell wants to bring to the floor 50 cents in additional cost to a gallon of gas. Right now that would be $4 a gallon. And we know when we get to the summer driving season, it's going to be $4. Add 50 cents: $4.50 a gallon. What do the Democrats bring to the floor? They bring nothing to the floor. Nothing.

Do we have plans? Actually, we have a bipartisan majority if the leadership would bring a bill to the floor. We have a bipartisan majority, most of the Republicans would vote for it, we'd get 40 or 50 Democrats, to move more supply, more supply like opening up the Outer Continental Shelf, more supply like coal-to-liquid technology, more supply like expanding nuclear power, more supply by going after the oil shale, more supply by going after our marginal oil wells. We can bring more supply.

We're the only industrialized nation in the world that doesn't use its resources. That's why we import all this crude oil. We don't use our resources. Coal to liquid, in Illinois alone, 250 years worth of fossil fuel. We could turn that into liquid fuel.

I know the liberal left and the environmentalists don't like coal. I know that. And they tout Kyoto. I know that. They tout our European friends.

The New York Times today: ``Europe Turns to Coal Again.'' Europe turns to coal.

When is this body going to turn to coal to solve our energy prices?

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a heroic educator who saved the life of one of her students a few weeks ago.

In the blink of an eye, a moment of levity and fun became a moment of terror, as fifth grader Kelci Ottwell, who had been at the lunch table, laughing at a friend's joke, suddenly found herself choking and unable to breathe. Gasping for air, Kelci moved toward her principal, Brenda Vernatti for help. Unable to speak, Kelci reached out for Ms. Vernatti's arm to get her attention.

Immediately sensing Kelci's distress, Ms. Vernatti swung into action and began to perform the Heimlich maneuver, trying in vain four times to dislodge the small piece of pizza that was by now causing Kelci's face to turn purple. Finally, on her fifth attempt, Kelci coughed up the pizza and began to breathe again.

Kelci's mother, Melissa, told the local newspaper, ``She's my hero. I want the world to know she saved my baby's life.''

Brenda Vernatti has served the Alton School District for 22 years, touching hundreds if not thousands of young lives. But just a few weeks ago, she went above and beyond the already lofty call of duty of an educator to become a life-saving hero.

Every day, our Nation is blessed to have heroic citizens ready to spring into action to help another in distress. Today, I have the honor of recognizing Brenda Vernatti, who has dedicated her life to helping others attain their goals through education, and who, in that blink of an eye, reminded us all of the heroes in our midst.

Mr. Speaker, from Congress Daily AM on Monday, 21 April, the heading was: Florida delight as talks intensify behind closed doors on several issues. Members negotiate behind the scenes to finish a farm bill conference and plan their maneuvers for moving a war supplemental bill and more possible tradeoffs to move a Colombia Free Trade Agreement. Funny. No talk about gasoline, no talk about the high energy prices. The number one issue affecting consumers today and the pocketbooks of mom and dad and driving kids to events is the high cost of gasoline.

When this majority took over, the price of a barrel of crude oil was $58.31. Today--actually, this is wrong--it was updated at $117. It did get to $118 a barrel. When you don't have a plan, you plan to fail. I would hope that the Democrat majority would, in their negotiations, talk about how they are going to address the high cost of energy in this country.

Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chairman, it's great to be down here to talk about healthy beaches again.

I spoke on the rule. The first colleague on the other side talked about oil wells and how they endanger healthy beaches, so it gave me an opportunity to continue to talk about the failed Democratic policies on energy and the continued increase in the cost of energy in this country and the continued future plan for energy increases in the decades to come.

It's a simple economic debate, supply and demand. We need more supply. The failed Democrat policies will not bring more supply to this debate.

How does it relate to healthy beaches? I will tell you how it relates to healthy beaches. What is the most damaging thing to a beach, an oil spill.

How do oil spills occur? They occur when we have these big super tankers traveling all around the world trying to feed the demand. We want to stop oil spills, and the best way to stop oil spills is to develop our own resources, redevelop our own oil wells. In southern Illinois, in Texas, on the Outer Continental Shelf, a lot of the places we have oil, the Democrat majority continues to put them off-limits.

What happens? Prices go up. Here is an example. We have seen this chart before, and I imagine we are going to see it a lot the rest of this year, except there is going to be a change. Every time we see it, the price of a barrel of crude oil is going to continue to go up.

When this majority, Speaker Pelosi, took the oath of office, swore us all in, the price of a barrel of crude oil was $58.31.

What is it today? Actually, this is wrong, they didn't update it. This was from a couple of days ago. I think it raised, got to $114, $114 a barrel. When you do not plan, you plan to fail. The Democrats have no plan. They said they had a plan, Speaker Pelosi is quoted, in a quote on April 24, 2006, ``Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices.''

I have a plan. The only plan was to increase gas prices, not lower them.

Here is a quote from Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on October 4, 2005: ``Democrats believe that we can do more for the American people who are struggling to deal with high gas prices.'' You are doing more for the people who are struggling with high gas prices, you are making it more difficult.

We have, as I have used the term before, bitter change. Why are folks bitter in America? Why are folks bitter in rural America? Because we are paying high gas prices because we can't get supply.

You bet we are bitter, because in rural America we drive the long distances to get to work. We are the folks who don't have buses, we don't have light rail. We have got a lot of rural Members here, and we need big vehicles to haul our beef and our pork and our corn to the refineries. We need trucks.

I brought down pictures yesterday of independent truckers going on strike. Why? Diesel oil is up over $4 a gallon.

When you don't have a plan, you plan to fail. What's the solution? Coal-to-liquid technologies. It's not imported. Coal field, U.S. refineries, U.S. jobs, lower price fuel. That's a solution.

What's another solution? These are all the areas Democrats have put off-limits for exploration. Look at it. You know what is even worse, what you all tried to do in the last energy bill, you tried to take a big chunk out of Colorado and say we are not going to explore there either.

Supply and demand, the simple basic economics. We have higher demand, you don't allow a supply, we get higher prices, over $1.02 a gallon for gas since the Democrats went into the majority. You know what?

It's going to continue to go up. You have no plan. How are we going to get these prices lower? ``Oh, let's tax the oil companies.'' That's really going to bring prices down. You know what that's going to do? It's going to raise prices and you are hurting the people you say you support.

You are hurting the middle class, you are hurting the lower middle class. This also translates into electricity, translates here into your great debate on climate change. John Dingell said let's address climate change by adding an additional 50 cents a gallon for gas.

Announcement By the Acting Chairman

Madam Chairman, the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi said, ``Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices.'' We are calling it the Pelosi premium.

Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chairman, I'm glad we are talking about healthy beaches. As I said earlier, one of the most damaging aspects about healthy beaches is an oil spill, and one way to limit the risk of oil spills is to become more self-reliant, and I know my colleague would appreciate it because he does a lot of renewal, and it's great work, but renewable alone can't fill the future demand. In fact, it really only nibbles around the edges.

I'm also glad we're opening up the discussion to climate change because the reality is is that climate change will cost the American public, and it's going to cost us big bucks. And those of us on our side who are willing to go into debate just hope that there's some honest discussion on the real costs needed.

I'm not a big cap-and-trade guy. I think it's a game by which we're going to play with the consumers hiding the real cost. Chairman Dingell, intellectually honest, said, let's add 50 cents a gallon to gasoline to help pay for the climate change cost. He's at least being intellectually honest because he's going to go and help the debate saying there is going to be a cost, we're going to have to pay for it, let's add 50 cents to a gallon of gas. Now, a gallon of gas is $3.50; that would make it $4. We know it's going to get to $4 this summer. That means a gallon of gas will be $4.50. That's the challenge.

The California Public Utility Commission on electricity generation said, let's add a 20 to 30 percent surcharge on our electricity bill. That's the cost we're going to incur to comply with climate change.

So, again, we're asking that there be a great debate on climate change, and as we're going to bring in money to help address this, that the people who are going to have to pay these costs know that there's going to be costs. And again, Chairman Dingell is being intellectually honest. The Public Utility Commission of California is being intellectually honest. And we are going to address that.

Because here is the problem. When the Democrats took office, the price of a barrel of crude oil was $58 a barrel. Now what is it today? I think this is actually wrong. It's $114 a barrel. $114.

Now, I came down here on a 1-minute this week, got some clips. Here is a clip from my district, Independent Truckers Join Strike. Independent Truckers Join Strike. You want to know why the aviation industry is going bust, all of these low-cost airlines? High fuel costs.

So if we want healthy beaches, and we don't want oil spills, we have to develop the resources that we have. We have a solution. One that the Democrat majority is unwilling to bring to the floor; although if they did, we would pass it. I could guarantee we would pass it. And that's using great natural resources in the only coal basin, the high plains of Montana, Wyoming, West Virginia, Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio. We know we have coal under the ground, and we know that we can turn that coal into synthetic fuel. Low-cost fuel, abundant supply, and we know that we can refine this coal using biomass and carbon sequestration cleaner than current crude oil refineries.

And where are our crude oil refineries? They're on the coast. Most of them are in the gulf coast. That's a great place to protect our healthy beaches, by having all of these refineries on the coast. And we saw what Katrina did. Katrina caused a disruption in cost. Katrina caused obviously outages in these refineries. This would give us the opportunity to have refineries located in the heartland with the commodity product of coal right there.

Dig the coal, American jobs; build the refinery, American jobs; refine the oil into fuel, American jobs; put it in a pipeline to the aviation industry, American jobs. What is clearer than that? It's a great success. But we can't get that moved to the floor. So what do we have? No supply, $113 a barrel.

Now I have read the quotes from the Democratic leadership. They had a plan in 2006 to lower gas prices. I have read the quotes. No one has disputed them. And guess what? You have only raised gas prices. And guess what is going to happen this summer? Gas prices are only going to go up higher. When you have no plan, you plan to fail.

Madam Speaker, it is, in essence, the third day in the legislative schedule when I come to the floor to talk about energy prices.

When this Democrat majority took over the House, the price of a barrel of crude oil was $58 a barrel. Today, it hovers around $111 a barrel.

In 2006, the Democrat leadership promised lower gas prices. What we've seen, in reality, is higher gas prices. We've seen negative change, which has caused bitterness in rural America with the high- increasing cost to travel around rural America. All we're asking is for a plan to bring on more supply.

I have been in this well numerous times in this Congress to talk about coal-to-liquid technologies. We shouldn't limit it to that. We should talk about expanding renewable fuels. We should talk about the outer continental shelf. We ought to talk about ANWR. We need to bring more supply to lower the cost of fuels because the average American citizens are tired of paying these high gas prices, and it hurts the economy of this country.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Lincoln Wildcats basketball team, winners of the Illinois Elementary School Association's Boys Class 4A State Championship.

This outstanding group of young men from Edwardsville, Illinois, took the State championship in February with a thrilling one point win over Normal Kingsley in the State finals. For the season, they posted a record of 24 wins against only 5 losses. Today I want to recognize coach Dustin Battas and assistant coach Matt Rogers, and the members of the Edwardsville Lincoln Wildcats State championship team: Diarra Cropper, Quincy Morgan, Brendan Colligan, Blake Brown, Casey Thebeau, Maleek Malone, Derek Page, Brian Gifford, Austin Abegg, Tony Miner, Jacob Nolan, Tyler Ogden, Will Suttles, Alex Jackson and Jared Krebs- Carr.

These student-athletes have made our community proud, and have represented Edwardsville with great honor. I congratulate them on bringing home the State title, and wish them the best of luck in all their future endeavors.

Madam Speaker, it was a pleasure to be down here listening to the special orders of my friends from the various States, and especially my friend from Connecticut, Mr. Courtney, and I understand his compassion and concern. But I will tell you that if we don't get a handle on these energy costs, people aren't going to have the money to do the things they want to do with their families on a day-to-day basis. So we have this time tonight to talk about energy and our energy status in the world today.

We started doing this last week on a bill that came to the floor that we are going to finish this week, the Beach Protection Act of 2007. We took that opportunity to talk about that. But we ought to be addressing some of the pressing concerns of this country today.

We hear the term that America, and rural America, is bitter. It is a big phrase today and over the weekend. They are bitter. They are bitter about high energy costs, and they are bitter about the fact that this Congress is not doing anything to address the supply part of this debate.

More supply means lower costs. That is basic economics 101. Anyone who has gone to have a bachelor's degree, and even some good high school programs teach economics, it is a simple supply and demand equation. So we are going to talk about energy tonight. My focus is going to be on supply, how we need more supply.

We also hear a lot this year about change. We want change, and everybody wants change. But, you know, change is not always good. Here is an example of change.

Since the Democrats got in the majority, when they first got sworn in, the price of a barrel of crude oil was $58.31. Today, the price of a barrel of crude oil is $111.15. I would say that is bad change. That is not good change. So change is not always good. This is negative change, and it flies in the face of promises from my friends on the other side of the aisle.

The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi said on April 24, 2006, about 2 years ago, ``Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down the skyrocketing gas prices.'' Well, that was almost $60 a barrel less ago, and $1 and change per gallon of gas less.

Majority leader Steny Hoyer said, October 4, 2005, ``Democrats believe that we can do more for the American people who are struggling to deal with high gas prices.''

Well, they did. They did. What did they do? They raised their gas prices. You want to talk about not being able to pay for dental care? People are using their money to get to work.

In rural America, we drive long distances. Rural America doesn't have the access of buses. Rural America doesn't have the opportunity to take the Metro or light rail.

Those who are driving distances to get to work are harmed exponentially greater. Democrats proffered lower gas prices. What do we have? We have higher gas prices. All we are asking them to do is keep their prices. Help them lower the price of gasoline, but they won't do it. Do you know why they won't do it?

They won't do it because they really hate fossil fuels in this country. They hate crude oil, and they hate coal. They hate crude oil, and they hate coal.

They hate fossil fuels, so to address high prices, what we have to do is bring on more fossil fuels to the market, and they won't do it. That's why we are not going to have any relief on gases.

Constituents ask me, what are you going to do to lower prices? What are you going to do, Congress? I just shake my head, and I said the only thing that's going to happen is prices are going to go up because demand is going to continue to go up, supply is going to stay the same, and you are going to have higher prices.

Democrat Whip Jim Clyburn, Democrat from South Carolina, said ``House Democrats have a plan to help curb rising gas prices.'' Jim got it wrong. ``No'' is not an energy plan. They had no plan, and when you have no plan, you plan to fail, and what do you get? You get higher prices.

We know we are going to have $4 a gallon gas this summer sometime. We know it. In fact, the newspapers are

starting to raise this issue, ``$4 gasoline seen possible this summer,'' the Buffalo News, April 9, 2008; price at the pump likely to reach $4, the Washington Times, April 9, 2008; ``$4 Per Gallon Gas Creeps Closer,'' Fox News, Denver, Colorado, April 9.

We know we are going to have $4 a gallon of gas. How do we stop that from happening? We have to bring on more supply. I have some friends here to join me, but I am going to finish with one solution that has bipartisan support, and that's coal-to-liquid technologies.

There are a lot of ways we can address this debate and this issue, but let me just pitch one to you. The Illinois Coal Basin, and I am from Illinois, I am biased, the Illinois Coal Basin is basically the State of Illinois and the southwestern part of Indiana and the western part of Kentucky. That's all a big coal field.

Under the ground there is as much fossil fuel energy in coal as Saudi Arabia has in oil, 250-year's worth. We have been mining and using it for generations. In fact, I am fourth-generation Lithuanian American. My great grandfather immigrated to my home town of Collinsville, Illinois, where I still live. What did he do? He worked in the coal mines. My grandfather worked in the coal mines.

In southern Illinois, we have coal mines and we have mine workers. We have an abundant natural resource.

Now, we know coal can be used to generate electricity, but I am not talking about generation of electricity right now. What I am talking about is liquid fuels, the stuff that we need to put in our cars so we can get to work. How do we lower the price of gasoline in this country? That's where coal-to-liquid technology comes in.

We also had these budget airlines, three of them went bankrupt, one is on the verge. What's one of the problems? The high cost of aviation fuel.

All those people are unemployed. They don't have a job. They are going to be a burden to the safety net. They are not going to have dental care which was provided by their employer. But now they are unemployed because of the high cost of jet fuel.

How do we bring liquid fuel back to the arena that the budget airlines and the soccer mom, who is shepherding those kids around in the minivan, can afford to do that. We bring on more supply. One option is to use our vast resources of coal in this country and use that technology that goes back to World War II, the Fischer-Tropsh technologies.

Synthetic fuel, Sasol, the South African oil company has been using it for decades. It just got permission to use synthetic aviation fuel for the British commercial air fleet.

We have not a single coal-to-liquid plant in this country. The premise is simple, you have a coal mine. This is surface mining, mostly western coal here. In Illinois it would be below surface.

At that location you build a coal-to-liquid refinery. First of all you have jobs, jobs in the coal mine. Then you have jobs that build a refinery. Then you have jobs to operate the coal mines and jobs to operate the refinery, good-paying jobs with good-paying benefits and dental care. Then you have a pipeline so you don't have to address the transportation of this fuel, and you pipe it to the major metropolitan areas of this country, or you pipe it to the air base.

You know the number one aviation fuel user in the world, you know who it is? Our United States Air Force. They are begging for this opportunity. They are held captives to imported crude oil and the high cost of jet fuel.

We can do it here. We know what Katrina did to the refineries in the gulf coast, it shut a couple of them down, causing price spikes, causing dislocations.

Well, what's the benefit of this technology? You don't have to have it on the gulf coast. You are not importing the crude oil. You can build one in southern Illinois. You could build one in Wyoming, in Montana. You could build one in Kentucky or Ohio or West Virginia, right where the coal is located, close to the pipeline that connects to our major metropolitan areas, available, low-cost fuel to turn into jet fuel, gasoline, aviation fuel, diesel fuel, things that are causing great concerns and problems in our country today.

We have got bills to do this. Many Members do. My bill, I am the primary cosponsor with Congressman Rick Boucher, a Democrat from Virginia, on a price-collar provision. There are provisions for long- term contracting. There are some other marketing provisions out there where we could do this, we could send a signal to industry.

We want to do this, we want to have these up and running in 5 years. We want to help decrease our reliance on imported crude oil. We want to lower the cost of fuel. This Congress could do it. I guarantee you if we did it, this administration would sign the bill.

It's up to Democrats who made promises in 2006 that they had a plan to lower the price of gasoline. You read the quotes. I read the quotes to you, Madam Speaker.

You know the promises that were made. You know the promises that were not kept. In fact, not only were the promises not kept, we have done worse. You didn't lower the cost of fuel, we raised the cost of fuel. We didn't lower the price of a barrel of crude oil.

When Speaker Pelosi got sworn in, the price of a barrel of crude oil was $58.31; today, $111. Now I did this part of the speech last week, it was $110. It has gone up $1 just since Wednesday.

With that, I am pleased to be joined by my colleague from New Jersey, Congressman Garrett. I thank him for joining me. I yield you some time.

I thank my colleague for coming down to the floor. As he was speaking I was thinking, and of course I started by talking about two buzz words that are out there because of this politicized season. I think we need to merge them together.

What we have from the Democrat majority on energy policy is bitter change. Bitter change; $58 a barrel for crude oil to $111 per barrel of crude oil; $2.40 for a gallon of gasoline to $3.50. We have bitter change, not good change, bitter change because there is no energy policy.

First there are the grand promises made by the Democratic leadership which I quoted earlier and will probably quote again. No change, bad change, bitter change. It is unfortunate because it is our citizens who are feeling the burden.

I started this last week again during the healthy beaches discussion. It is amazing as I was looking at the stories over the weekend flying home and flying back today, a whole bunch of articles. ``Truckers feel the crunch of high diesel prices.'' This one is better. ``Independent truckers join strike.'' It has tractor-trailer rigs, shut them down, on strike. Try $4 a gallon; bitter change to the independent truck driver. There is no energy policy. When you have no policy, you have a failed policy.

Another article, ``High fuel prices mean high costs.'' There is a lot of blame being given to the agricultural sector because of the high cost of food, but the Federal Reserve Bank in Kansas City said over the past three decades, rising labor and energy costs have boosted that share steadily from 67 percent in the 1970s to 80 percent today.

The Federal Reserve Bank also estimated that a 10 percent gain in energy prices could contribute to 5.2 percent increase in retail food prices. And, John Urbanchuk in an article ``The Relative Impact of Corn and Energy Prices in the Grocery Aisle'' on June 14, 2007, said rising energy prices had a more significant impact on food prices than did corn.

Bitter change; no energy plan. The Democrats failed to bring supply into the energy debate. We can pass efficiencies and renewables, but the reality is it is only nibbling around the edges. The Energy Information Agency projects a 30 percent increase in demand in electricity by 2030, a 30 percent demand increase. And we are nibbling around the edges. People think we are going to do it with solar panels and wind turbines. They can help. We would like to have them. In fact, I just heard Illinois is one of the largest States to try to employ wind power. But it is not going to meet our demand. Energy prices are going to go up, and when they do, the average American citizen, especially in rural America, pays a disproportionate burden because we have to travel long distances to go to work. We don't have the commuter rails and the bus services. What we have is our truck. And we like our trucks.

I am going to talk about electricity generation. I have spent a lot of time on liquid fuels, but I am joined by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Sullivan) and so I yield to him at this time.

I thank my colleague, and especially for again returning the focus to the national security dynamics of this.

The United States Air Force is the number one consumer of aviation fuel in the world. What are they asking for? They want a safe, reliable supply of aviation fuel. Reliable. The only way they are going to get a reliable supply of aviation fuel is if that aviation fuel is produced by a commodity product where we are not relying on importation. That goes back to this debate on coal-to-liquid technologies.

Again, just in the Illinois coal basin alone, 250 years worth, as much energy as Saudi Arabia has in crude oil, just the Illinois coal basin alone. We are not talking about the Wyoming-Montana coal basin or the West Virginia, Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky region. We are talking about the Illinois coal basin has as much energy as Saudi Arabia has in oil.

So as we go back to the coal-to-liquid debate and we are talking about national security, and we need to have the fuel to fly our war machines, coal, locally discovered, developed, brought to the surface, with a coal-to-liquid refinery, built by the building trades, operated by organized labor and our boilermaker friends, high-paying wages, good benefits, not on the coastal plain, in the Midwest, pipeline to, and this chart just happens to show an F-18 Tomcat, a United States Air Force fighter plane.

Our Air Force is asking for this for national security, a reliable source of jet fuel, and we continue to delay.

What's the other world doing? What's the other countries, other world doing?

Well, Russia is attempting to grab a vast chunk of the Arctic to claim to its vast potential oil, gas and mineral wells to fuel that country's economy. Russia's going after fossil fuels.

Well, what's our other friends doing?

Brazil, Russia, India and China have overtaken the United States in dominating the global energy industry, according to a study by Goldman Sachs.

What's the Chinese doing? China is building 40 nuclear plants in the next 15 years. 40. We'll be lucky to have one. One. No carbon emissions in a nuclear power plant. Zero.

I think that's the biggest frustration that a lot of us have from our friends on the environmental left. They don't like nuclear power. They don't like coal. They don't like crude oil. We're trying to find out what they like.

China is planning 40 nuclear power plants in the next 15 years, and I pray that we have one. I would be ecstatic to have four. There's no way we'll have 15. There's just no way. The United States has not licensed one nuclear power plant in 30 years, not one, due to my friends on the other side's continued opposition to nuclear power.

We could bring nuclear power legislation to the floor in this Congress. And it would have bipartisan support. All the Republicans would support it. Well, we might lose about three. And I bet we could grab 40 Democrats that would support it. I bet we could have a bipartisan majority vote on coal-to-liquid technologies. I'd bet it'd be the same. We'd have all the Republicans minus a handful, and we'd get about 40 Democrat votes. But this Democrat leadership will not bring a bill to the floor that addresses the supply debate.

China opened new domestic energy reserves in 2004 and has planned to increase production by about 8 billion barrels by 2010.

Democrats refuse to allow American workers to produce American oil. In fact, in the energy debate last year, not the final bill that passed, but the two that didn't get signed into law, they put another area of natural gas off limits.

We need increased supply. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if you want lower prices, you have to have more supply. We don't get any help.

China's increasing offshore energy production to reduce its own dependence on foreign oil. Let me say that, because I've got some friends over there who live on the coast. China is increasing offshore energy production. In fact, we know just 50 miles off of Florida, 50 miles, it's not a U.S. energy company or a U.S. energy exploration to go after the oil in the Gulf 50 miles off Miami. It's China. China has better access to our oil reserves on the Outer

Continental Shelf than we have. Isn't that crazy?

China's increasing offshore energy production to reduce its own dependence on foreign oil, growing that production at an average of 15.3 percent per year, with plans to make offshore oil production China's largest source of oil by doubling production by 2010.

And we know what happens any time we talk about offshore exploration, a counting of gas and oil reserves, just trying to figure out what's there we have a fight.

China invested $24 billion in large scale coal liquification technologies. Oh, that sounds familiar. Coal-to-liquid technologies.

The United States, what are we doing? Zip, zero, nada, nothing.

What's China doing? China invested $24 billion in large scale coal liquification technology. We can't get a vote on that on the floor. China's expanding its natural gas infrastructure by constructing pipelines. We can't get a pipeline bill moved.

China rapidly is expanding its refining capacity. Democrats have repeatedly voted against expanding American refinery capacity. In fact, one of the huge problems we have, which I find is really--I think people understand that we import crude oil. We're relying on imported crude oil and that's bad.

What the public, I think, would even get angrier at is we import refined product. We import gasoline. So not only, we lose the refining jobs. It would be better for us to import the crude oil and refine that crude oil, or at least we'd have our friends in the refining industry, many of those bargaining unit employees would have jobs. But we are importing refined product. Criminal negligence.

China is ambitiously developing its nuclear power industry with plans to spend approximately $50 billion on 30 additional nuclear reactors within the next 15 years. China is planning on constructing many new large scale hydroelectric projects over the forecast period, including the 18.2 gigawatt Three Gorges dam project, which is scheduled to be operational by 2009.

In fact, we're tearing down dams. We're not expanding hydroelectric power. 50 percent of the electricity we use is produced by coal in this country. 50 percent. 20 percent by nuclear power, 20 percent by hydroelectric, and the rest the others.

I'm going to move to the concern. With no plan to address this problem, which is the escalating costs of crude oil, again, when Speaker Pelosi took over, $58 a barrel, crude oil.

I'll be honest. Bush took over it was $27. I always say that. Bush it was $27, Pelosi, $58, now $111. With all the promises, and maybe I'll just read those one more time as I end.

But the basic premise is, under Democrat leadership of the House, the average American is paying more. We're paying more. We're going to pay more in taxes. We know that. But this isn't a special order on taxes. This is a special order on energy.

We're paying more at the pump. Here's the reason why. The high cost of a barrel of crude oil, we're relying on imported crude oil. One solution would be technology. Another would be to move into electric cars. But guess what? Electric cars need an electric supply. They'll need nuclear power plants. They'll need coal generating, coal, then the electricity generation plants buy coal. There's going to be, we have to have something to charge the batteries to allow these battery-run cars to run.

Let's talk a minute about global climate change. We know that the public is paying more at the pump when the Democrat majority promised lower prices. That's a given.

We had a hearing in the subcommittee last week. My issue to the panelists was, the American public, they need to understand that if we address global climate change there is going to be a cost.

Of course, some on the environmental left said no. We're going to have all these efficiencies. We're going to have all these new jobs. It's going to be a wash.

Well, it's funny, flying home, an AP story on the 12th, the State of California is going to put on the electrical bill, a 25 or 30 percent surcharge on customers' electric and gas bills for global climate change. So your electricity bills are going to go up. Gas prices are up. Electricity prices are up. You're going to pay more in taxes.

This is bitter change, bitter change, not good change. Bitter change. Bitter change for the average American who all they want to do is go to work and pay their bills, take care of their family, try to save some for the future. They can't save with these high energy prices.

And you saw the independent truckers, the article I held up.

If we could have effective change, let's assume that we do all we can as Americans to lead the way, go through all this pain. Do you really believe that our Chinese friends, after I gave all the stats on what they're doing, are going to comply with an international agreement? Not only do I not believe it, they've told me no. And I've mentioned this in many committee hearings.

In fact, the senior Chinese official said twice to two of my Democratic colleagues' questions when they said, if the United States led, would you agree to an international agreement to coal carbon?

And their answer was, you all have had, well they didn't use you all. That's kind of a Southern Illinois thing. They said, you have had 200 years to develop a middle class in your country using fossil fuels, and it's our turn. That doesn't sound like a country that wants to address carbon debate in an international arena.

So should Americans, should we go through all this pain on global climate change, and have no gain? Do we go through all this exercise, all these job dislocations, all this pain, for not one single benefit?

And if we do, you know, I just want us to be transparent with our citizens. Intellectually honest. Chairman Dingell said, you know, if we want to be honest with the American people, what we should do is put 50 cents additional tax on gasoline and take that money, and address our carbon debate.

Well, that works great. That now takes $3.50 a gallon of gas, which people are outraged about, and brings it up to $4. And it's going to get to $4 without the additional 50 cent tax. But at least it's intellectually honest, saying that there's going to be a cost.

The California Public Utility Commission is honest. 25 to 30 percent increase on your energy bill for climate change. Great.

Well, it wasn't a front-page story. It was, I don't know, I ripped it up. I think it was, like, the Business Section, like D6, way in the back. So I'm not sure if it made the front page of the California papers, but that's what their public utility commission has agreed to do.

All pain, no gain. The public needs to know the cost and be prepared to assume the cost.

All I see in this debate on energy is bitter change, bitter change for the working men and women of this country. This is contrary to the promises made.

April 24, 2006, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said ``Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices.'' Bring down skyrocketing gas. They weren't even skyrocketing then compared to what we have now. Now we've got skyrocketing gas prices.

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said, ``Democrats believe that we can do more for the American people who are struggling to deal with high gas prices.''

Y'all did more? You raised gas prices even more.

Democratic Whip Jim Clyburn said, ``House Democrats have a plan to help curb rising gas prices.''

No energy plan is a plan to fail. We go from $58.31 a barrel of crude oil to today, $111.

Now, I got these on little, kind of like a Blue Dog type of thing. I got this on a moveable type of a number system here. So that if it goes up, I can add. If it goes down, I can adjust. But the reality is, the spread, under the leadership of this House, has only gone up. And I believe, and the economists today believe, it will continue to go up.

We can do better. We can do better. I talked to many of my friends on the other side. I actually voted for CAFE language. That was a hard thing for me to do. Helped expand the renewable fuel standard. Brought biodiesel and ethanol into the national energy debate. That's all good stuff. Energy Star provisions. Electricity savings provisions.

We want the deployment of solar cells. We want wind power. As I mentioned earlier, Illinois could be at the forefront of electricity generation by wind.

What we do know, Texas had to call their high electricity users when their wind turbines stopped turning because the wind stopped blowing. That's the challenge of renewable energy. Instead of having a consistent base-load energy, and in this country it's undisputed that coal is the primary commodity product that produces 50 percent of the electricity generation in this country. The electricity we're using in the Capitol building tonight is produced by coal. The electricity on the Capitol grounds is produced by coal.

There are some of my friends on the other side that would like us to not use another ounce of fossil fuels ever in this country. I am afraid of those days because those days will only occur when there's another worldwide recession. And you want to see the pain and the agony and the frustration on the middle- and the lower-middle class of our country, wait till there's no jobs. We won't be putting carbon in the air. That will be good for some people, but we won't be employing our citizens either. And that will be a shame.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank you for giving me this time. I want to thank my colleagues, Congressman Garrett and Congressman Sullivan, for joining me in a plea to my friends on the other side that, as we continue to talk about energy, we don't disregard the supply debate. That's got to be part of the solution. It just has to be because just so much of the electricity that we use today is based upon 50 percent coal, 20 percent nuclear, 20 percent hydroelectric. They have to be part of the mix. It's my plea that, as we move forward and try to address the high cost of electricity and liquid fuel, we remember the great resources that we have in this country and have a plan to use them.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague bringing up the issue of energy and the connection of energy to this bill because that is what we intend to do here today.

The irony behind this debate is that Americans really appreciate healthy beaches; but what they are really mad about is high gas prices. I have three kids, 15, 13 and 8. My wife is driving them all over the world to attend every event that kids do today, and the soccer moms of the world are outraged over the price of gas that they are paying.

And what has this Democrat majority been doing to continue to affect the price of gas, we just heard it, let's take more assets off the ability to explore. We just heard it from my colleague who just said no more exploration for oil. Where is the plan that the Speaker touted would lower gas prices? That was over 700 days ago. We want answers. We want this majority to do something about the high cost of gasoline.

We have truck drivers prepared to strike over the price of diesel, $4 a gallon gasoline is on the horizon, and this majority is doing nothing, nothing.

Here is the energy plan: When you have no energy plan, you plan to fail. When this majority took over, the price of a barrel of crude oil was $58. What is it today, $110 per barrel. That translates into a gasoline price of originally $2.33 a gallon to now, $3.34, $3.50, $3.75, and $4. At $3.44, that is a $1.01 increase since this majority took over. Where is the energy plan to lower gasoline prices? The Speaker's plan means that you pay more in energy costs in this country.

The beaches that are affected in this legislation, Great Lakes, the coastal beaches, guess what, if I want to take advantage of these healthy beaches, I would have to drive about 285 miles to get to the Great Lakes. I would have to drive a lot farther, almost 745 miles to get to the gulf coast. Last year the cost to Chicago would be about $53. This year the cost is $76. We lose discretionary income when we allow gas prices to go up.

Another connection, to go to the great State of Florida to take my family on a vacation, that would have cost me last year $138 to drive. This year, $200 to drive. Do you think that is not going to affect the economy of the Florida coastal areas? Do you think that is going to halt our folks going to your State, my friend from Miami, to enjoy these great, healthy beaches. My folks can't afford to drive to these beaches to enjoy them anymore.

And what is the Democrat plan for gas prices? Silence. Nothing. The only plan is the plan to fail. The only plan is higher prices. Here it is: $58 a barrel when you came in, $110 a barrel today.

Let me give you some quotes. Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on April 24, 2006, ``Democrats have a commonsense plan to bring down skyrocketing gas prices.''

Well, these skyrocketing prices aren't going down, folks. Speaker Pelosi's plan is to have skyrocketing price increases for gasoline, not decreases. We got it wrong.

It's this whole change mentality. Change is good. Change can be bad. The change in this majority has been bad for the cost of energy in this country.

And what are we doing? We're talking about healthy beaches. Healthy beaches. We ought to be talking about the price of gasoline. We ought to be talking about the price of diesel fuel. We ought to be talking about the price of electricity generation, nuclear power, clean coal technology. But no, healthy beaches. I hope my folks can enjoy and benefit by these healthy beaches.

It's been days since Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said, ``Democrats believe that we can do more for the American people who are struggling to deal with high gas prices.'' Mr. Majority leader, what did you do? You raised prices. You didn't decrease prices. You raised prices. Everyone knows that prices have gone up.

Truckers are going to strike over record diesel prices. Diesel this week was at an average of more than $4 a gallon in Oregon and Washington, and nearly $4.12.

In California, according to the American Trucking Association, if a trucker is filling up a 300-gallon semi, that bill could top $1,200.

We want to talk about competitive nature. We want manufacturing jobs in this country. Energy prices are killing our ability to compete in the world economy. It's killing our ability to get or product to the ports to ship them overseas to be competitive. It's killing our ability to manufacture the goods using innovation and technology, because that requires energy.

No energy plan is a plan to fail. Change is not always good. This is a change that the Democrat majority has brought us. $58.31, the price of a barrel of crude oil upon the assumption of the leadership here in this chamber. Current price today, $110.61. I have those on Velcro tabs so I can just keep following that price as it keeps going up.

Sometimes a barrel of crude oil is hard to follow. People don't know what it translates into. Well, I translated it earlier, from $2.33 a gallon, to, on average, $3.34 a gallon, and we know it's going to hit 4. We know it's going to hit 4. And when it hits 4, who are they going to call? They're going to call us. And what are we going to say? We're going to say, ``Oh, the Democrats promised a plan in 2006 to lower prices.'' They're in the majority now. Let's see their plan.

A failure to plan is a plan that fails. You have no plan. We're increasing our costs. The economy is hurting, and we bring healthy beaches to the floor. Healthy beaches. High energy costs.

And my colleague who just followed me talked about excluding exploration of energy. She tied this debate to energy. She understood the importance.

Democrats have voted, not once, not twice, but four times to raise energy taxes on the 110th Congress.

There's a debate in the State of Illinois to lower our gas tax. Why? So the average American citizen can afford to do the job. In rural America, when we have to drive long distances, this directly affects the pocketbook of every citizen in rural America. Every citizen. They're going to drive 20, 30, 40 miles just to go to work.

Talk about the inner cities and the traffic congestion, the people who are idling, they're going to end up paying more.

Four times the Democrats have said we're going to change the gas price debate here in America and we're going to lower prices. We know that that hasn't worked. Not only have they added insult to injury, they said not only aren't we paying enough in gas prices now, but we want to put more taxes on gasoline. Shoot, $3.50 is not enough. Let's get to 4. Let's pay $4.50 a gallon. Let's pay higher energy costs.

And what do we see? The periodicals and newspapers, the print media are starting to understand. In the Buffalo News, April 9: $4 Gasoline Seems Possible This Summer.

There used to be a time when Americans got outraged at $3 a gallon. Well, we've sensitized them to over $3 a gallon. They were promised by the Democrat majority they would lower gas prices. They've increased gas prices. Now we have to get prepared for $4 a gallon.

What's next?

No energy plan is a plan to fail. The Washington Times: Price at the Pump Likely to Reach $4. Fox News, Denver, Colorado: $4 Per Gallon Creeps Closer.

Friends, healthy beaches are important. We all want to benefit from them. I'd like to take my family to a beach. A lot of my constituents like to go there. But if they can't afford the gasoline in the minivan to get them to appreciate these healthy beaches, for what benefit?

The Democrats, when they were in the majority, promised us, I've got the quotes, they promised us lower gas prices, lower gas prices. I read the quotes. Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Hoyer, I've got one from Jim Clyburn. Lower prices.

What do we have? Higher prices? And it's about time you started accepting responsibility and do something about these high prices.

Mr. Speaker, I would understand my colleague would be upset about speaking. I would understand why you would be ashamed about talking about healthy beaches and not addressing the real concerns of America which is high energy costs.

I've been on the floor numerous times, motions to recommit over the past year and a half to talk about energy crises. One the big things I've talked about is coal to liquid technologies.

You know what? It was your colleague who stepped on the floor and talked about we don't want oil exploration off the coast. We don't want more crude oil supplies.

Well, I have a solution that would help keep our beaches healthy. Let's use coal to liquid technologies. Let's mine our vast abundant resource of coal right here. Let's build a coal to liquid refinery. In fact, Sasol, the South African energy company, just announced that the Brits are going to buy synthetic aviation fuel.

You know, we had all these aviation industry folks just go bankrupt, these low cost airlines that could get to these healthy beaches. You know one reason why they went bankrupt? The high cost of aviation fuel. Those are jobs gone. Those are the inability of me and my family on a low cost airline to appreciate these healthy beaches.

Well, I have a solution. They've been to the floor on motion to commit coal to liquid technology. Get our coal, refine it in to liquid fuels, put it in a pipeline and ship it to our commercial and military aviation.

I've been using this chart for a year and a half. Has this majority moved on decreasing our reliance on imported crude oil? Negligibly. Zip, zero. Maybe on the RFS. I voted for it. I appreciate that.

But doing anything to expand our ability to get our own resources, no, we're here talking about healthy beaches. We don't want to talk about crude oil exploration. We want to talk about pristine beaches. We don't want to talk about that we're paying $110 per barrel of crude oil when it was $58 when you all came into the majority. Translates to a dollar more in gas. It's going to reach 4.

So we have some options. We can be here spending all day talking about healthy beaches while our businesses and industries fall further behind, fail to compete because of high energy costs.

I haven't even got involved in climate change. Climate change is going

to bring additional cost to your gas tank, to your electricity. In fact, the only one who's been intellectually honest about this is Chairman Dingell. What does he say? Fifty cents a gallon more to comply with climate change.

Now, if we want to do that, then let's vote on it. But you know what? You won't do it because it'll take that $4 a gallon a gas and move it up to $4.50.

Guess what? People are going to say, let's re-evaluate this. Let's understand if all the world nations are going to comply. Do we want all this pain, all that job dislocation, all these higher energy costs and no benefit?

If India and China do not comply, we get no benefit. All pain, no gain. All pain, job dislocation, higher energy costs, no gain. We ought to insist, before we go into any climate change agreement, that India and China sign on the dotted line verifiable that we know they're going to comply.

You know what? I've talked to them. They're not going to do it. They are not going to do it.

So why assume these costs? Why burden the American consumer? Why deplete our hotel and tourism industry by people not being able to get there, either through airlines who have failed or the ability to drive the long distances to get there.

This majority has had no plan to address. Well, they have. They've promised, lower gas prices, 2006. This Democrat majority promised lower gas prices, lower gas prices. What do we have? Higher gas prices. And no plan to mitigate.

You know how you mitigate it? You bring on more supply. And you all won't do that.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to mourn the passing of a great community leader and a great friend.

Mayor Stan Schaeffer of Collinsville, Illinois, passed away March 7, 2008, at his home in Collinsville. Like so many of Stan's constituents, I knew him in many different capacities: not only did he serve our city as mayor for the last 9 years, he was also a city councilman, a teacher for over 40 years, and a coach of many sports teams.

Stan was dedicated to seeing our community and our region move forward. His tenure as mayor will be remembered as one during which Collinsville grew in population and grew economically through business development, but one during which our town remained the caring, close- knit community it has always been.

Many individuals forget that all the basic services we require--local government, police, fire, sanitation, local roads--come from local government. Collinsville faced many challenges during Stan's tenure. His optimistic outlook and his calm spirit is a path that future leaders should follow.

My thoughts and prayers are with his wife, Liz, his daughter Carrie, his stepdaughters Linda, Paula and Jami, his stepsons Timothy and Scott, his fifteen grandchildren, and all those who mourn this day for our friend Stan. He devoted his life to his family and his community, and he left a positive mark on both. He will be dearly missed by all of us who had the privilege to know him.

Madam Speaker, I rise today with a grateful heart to pay tribute to a selfless American, Marlene Lee of Boyds, Maryland.

In 2003, Marlene developed ``Operation Atlas'', a community outreach program for injured soldiers and their visiting families at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. It is through this program that I have been able to work with Marlene on a nearly monthly basis as she escorts soldiers and their families on tours of the Capitol.

Marlene is an incredibly giving person, both of her time and talents. Her son, Greg, has served two tours in Iraq, so she knows intimately the pains military families go through. Yet, she is always ready with a willing hand, a kind heart, and a new way to serve others. Named as one of the American Red Cross Volunteers of the Year in 2003, Marlene was recognized again in 2004 by the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. She is also on the board of directors of ``Operation Support Our Troops'' and the committee for Wheels for Warriors.

Through her time spent with wounded and recovering soldiers, Marlene recognized the need to reach out to children ``who know of, care about, or just plain love a wounded warrior.'' She went back to school, earning a master's of arts in thanatology, the study of death, dying, and bereavement, from Hood College.

With the motto of ``Children `serve' and sacrifice, too'', Marlene has written two books for children on dealing with the loss of a loved one in the Armed Services: The Hero In My Pocket and That's My Hope. She donates a portion of the proceeds from book sales to selected organizations that assist military families.

I am honored by the time that I have been able to share in service with Marlene. She is a dedicated and humble person who goes out of her way to bless the lives of the men, women and the children in our military families and communities. May God continue to bless her and America.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Deputy Dave Mills of Gallatin County, Illinois. Deputy Mills passed away suddenly on March 11, 2008.

Deputy Dave, as he was affectionately known to the students in Gallatin County, was the Gallatin County School District DARE Officer. I received a letter from a student in Gallatin County, Taylor Jackson, who had this to say about Deputy Dave; ``He was really close to me and most of the students of my school.'' Taylor went on to write, ``he was a great man and a huge influence to me and my teachers and my fellow students . . . I'm only 13, but he really meant the world to me and many others.''

As we can tell from Taylor's words, Deputy Mills' work certainly had an impact that will be forever etched into the hearts and minds of those whose lives he touched. I extend my sympathy to the family and friends of Deputy Dave Mills. My prayers will be with them and the Gallatin County community as they mourn this great loss.

Madam Speaker, energy security is national security. When President Bush was sworn into office, a barrel of crude oil was approximately $27 a barrel. When the Democrats took over the House, the price of a barrel of crude oil was $58, a $31 increase.

Since this Democrat-controlled House has been in power, the price of a barrel of crude oil has gone from $35 to today $110 a barrel of crude oil.

Now, what's the solution? The solution is more supply. Democrats continue to block Outer Continental Shelf exploration. They continue to block oil exploration. They continue to block coal-to-liquid technologies.

More supply brings lower prices. If you know basic economics supply and demand, you know that if you have a high demand you need more supply.

Until we bring more supply back into this debate, the only thing we could

tell our consumers and our constituents is be prepared for more price spikes. Energy security is national security.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Granada Theater located in Mt. Vernon, Illinois, as the community celebrates its 70th anniversary.

The Granada Theater was designed in 1937 by the Boller Brothers and was recently reopened to the public with a weekend long celebration. Many wonderful memories were shared by community members who recalled the original theater and several great movie classics. The announcement that Pearl Harbor had been attacked and the first air conditioning system in the theater were among many unforgettable memories. However, one of the greatest memories that will be shared for years to come was created that night with the relighting of the marquee.

Countless hours of hard work and dedication from community members, along with local businesses, came together to make this celebration possible. Along with the memories shared there were theatrical performances, and the first movie was shown in the renovated theater. The renovated theater is intended to be used for other community events, such as dinner theaters and wedding receptions.

I am pleased to congratulate the Granada Theater on its 70th anniversary celebration.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor the Centralia Orphans basketball team, which on Friday, February 15, 2008, became the first high school boys' basketball program in the State of Illinois-- and just the second in the nation--to record its 2,000th victory.

The visiting Orphans defeated the arch-rival Mt. Vernon High School Rams 45-43 to reach the milestone.

Current members of the Orphans include Evan Burmester, Adrian Dabney, Ben Kracht, Stile Smith, Carlton Westbrook, Keith Johnson, Justin Keef, Devan Wells, Brandon Buchanan, Myron Cunningham, R.J. Kwiatkowski, and Mark McConnaughy. Their head coach is Lee Bennett, who is assisted by Brad Goewey, Ryan Blaha, and Doug Jack.

Since its beginning in 1906, the Centralia boys' basketball team has featured such standout players as future Olympic track star Dwight ``Dike'' Eddleman, future Harlem Globetrotter Bobby Joe Mason, and future Los Angeles Laker Dickie Garrett. The Orphans have won three Illinois State championships, all under legendary High School Hall of Fame Coach Arthur L. Trout.

I send congratulations to the players, coaches, students, alumni, and fans of Centralia High School on a remarkable achievement.

Mr. Speaker, I too want to join my colleague from the State of Kansas to raise concern about the recent announcement by the United States Air Force on the tanker contract.

National security is always a big concern. Having airplanes built by U.S. manufacturers and paid for by U.S. tax dollars is critically important. We want to continue to make sure that as we look at this contracting and bid-letting that everything was done according to our current rule of law and the processes designed by this House in legislation passed over this year. I promise to commit myself to the work of my colleague from Kansas to make sure that that all was done.